Online
AlainCo Tech-watcher, admin
  • Male
  • from Villejuif
  • Member since Feb 9th 2014

Posts by AlainCo

  • Brillouin Energy Corporation: HOSTS INFORMATION SESSION ON LENR THERMAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY AT U.S. CAPITOL

    Cold Fusion Now reports a news by Brillouin about a meeting on Capitol Hill last week, where they presented their technology.
    This is the event described recently by "Conservative base".


    http://coldfusionnow.org/brill…echnology-at-u-s-capitol/



    Wish them good luck. I hope that with COP21 process, LENR will catch political interest.


    I'm curious to read the report by Dr Banning Garrett.

  • Conservative Base : Political article on Brillouin Energy Corporation, and LENR

    A "Conservative" journal "Conservative base" is publishing an article on Brollouin Energy Corp


    The article state announce in US Capitol and report by Dr Banning Garett, that I am not aware of,





    It remind us, beside Brillouin announce, many recent news, like Tohoku University LENR lab, opening, of Bill gates interest.


    They remind the "no regret" nature of LENR, leading to a probable political consensus.

    Quote


    Conservatives will actually like LENR because of the strong implications for America’s national security, while liberals should like its clean energy aspects. This may be one of those rare cases in American politics today where both sides can come together to do what is right for America.


    They finally have a "nasty" comment on DoE, and call for lobbying the DoE and DoD.

    Quote


    So where is the US Department of Energy? The military has a name for it – Absent Without Leave (AWOL). It’s time now for the DOE to get involved with LENR, do whatever testing is required, and evaluate and validate the recent breakthrough observed by SRI and others. The Department of Defense should also get involved to harness this technology for America’s national security needs. Contact and urge your member of Congress to ensure DOE and DOD move out on this game-changing “Made in America” technology.


    This online-journal seems not to be so famous (?), but it seems quite rationally analysing the situation.
    I am more puzzled about the claim of US capitol announce with Michael McKubre and the report of Banning Garett.


    EDIT: Cold Fusion Now covered the meeting on Capitol Hill in DC http://coldfusionnow.org/brill…echnology-at-u-s-capitol/ (thanks to pal Mahler for the hint)

  • Experimental Evidence on Rossi Devices

    Read my previous post few month ago, where it was detailed.


    I computed the response (energy received by the bolometers) of the IR cam in the 7.5-13um (nearly affine law).
    From IR cam signal I get a temperature that depend on emissivity according to that affine law.


    This allow me to estimate the lowest possible temperature if emissivity is not what is assumed (like if emissivity at 900W is same as at 450W.


    this give me a minimum ratio of absolute temperature change between 450-800-900, which I can interpret as radiation power with power of 4


    The lower temperature, bounded by maximum emissivity change (I just assume to does not grow which is absurd), gives the number I show you,


    The "discount" on temperature that we agree on, finally create a discount on radiation and convection/conduction power.
    The convection par is much less discounted than the T^4, and the high temperature part, imply a bigger discount than the lower temperature part.
    Thus assuming all is radiation at maximum temperature, which is false, maximise the discount on power, following to the error (underestimation) on emissivity.


    Despite that discount on temperature, and T4 radiated power changing much more than the electric power, even with lower temperature, there is a COP>1.5.


    As I say, the 800-900W step is even more clear as emissivity cannot have changed so much, especially if the temperature is so low, and thus the temperature change so low.


    Now if you say it is not a fraud, which is proven by the protocol itself, whatever is the result, I don't care this test failed. Of course it work in their labs, or they would have stopped all business, or organized a pony show "à la Defkalion", à la "Orbo", "à la Kesche".


    Rossi may be stubborn like some inventors, but neither Woodford, nor Darden, nor his engineers, nor Rossi's engineers.
    This turn to Apollo conspiracy theory.


    You can imagine delusion with finance in a domain where it is fashion, like greentech, biotech, fintech, but cold fusion is not fashion, it is known publicly to be non existent, to be fraud, despite all evidence.
    Anyone believing in cold fusion, in E-cat, have analysed evidence before making a statement.


    We sure don't have all the document Darden have, we did not send our experts, but darden did.
    And he is all but fleeing the media since few month.

  • Experimental Evidence on Rossi Devices

    To Thomas about my computation, I follow your reasoning and mostly agree.
    I used an approximation like Raley Jeans, and I don't consider I know the temperature at al.
    I just know the reading of the IR Cam, which is related to temperature via emissivity.
    This is old computation, and given the current news, that ferrara and isotopic shift are good, I have more to do than dig old stories.


    My way is to use ratio, and avoid assumptions and absolute value for emissivity or temperature.
    what I found is that the ratio of IR cam measurement between 450-800-900W, observing the calibration done at 450W was correct, but the emissivity was unknown, imply a COP>>1 unless emissivity grow hugely from 450 to 900W, which is absurd for alumina.


    my bet is that you don't take correctly the calibration with TC and known emissivity dots at 450W.
    You method is too complex for me.

  • Industrial Heat Slideshow Posted (Cobraf.com)

    An announce in Chinese about the opening in April 2014 of the Nichel Hydrogen Energy lab
    http://gd.sina.com.cn/szfinance/cyb/2014-04-21/1207434.html


  • Rossi Explains ‘Positive or Negative’

    Looking for modern TEG performance I found this article
    http://www.gizmag.com/most-eff…oelectric-material/24210/
    http://www.nature.com/nature/j…416/full/nature11439.html


    the performance is similar, 15-20% at similar temperature (400-600C) with same material base with Tellurium made semiconductor (Rossi used Bismuth, and various doping and surface treatment).
    The material is nano-structured too.

    Quote


    With about two-thirds of all used energy being lost as waste heat, there is a compelling need for high-performance thermoelectric materials that can directly and reversibly convert heat to electrical energy. However, the practical realization of thermoelectric materials is limited by their hitherto low figure of merit, ZT, which governs the Carnot efficiency according to the second law of thermodynamics. The recent successful strategy of nanostructuring to reduce thermal conductivity has achieved record-high ZT values in the range 1.5–1.8 at 750–900 kelvin1, 2, 3, but still falls short of the generally desired threshold value of 2. Nanostructures in bulk thermoelectrics allow effective phonon scattering of a significant portion of the phonon spectrum, but phonons with long mean free paths remain largely unaffected. Here we show that heat-carrying phonons with long mean free paths can be scattered by controlling and fine-tuning the mesoscale architecture of nanostructured thermoelectric materials. Thus, by considering sources of scattering on all relevant length scales in a hierarchical fashion—from atomic-scale lattice disorder and nanoscale endotaxial precipitates to mesoscale grain boundaries—we achieve the maximum reduction in lattice thermal conductivity and a large enhancement in the thermoelectric performance of PbTe. By taking such a panoscopic approach to the scattering of heat-carrying phonons across integrated length scales, we go beyond nanostructuring and demonstrate a ZT value of ~2.2 at 915 kelvin in p-type PbTe endotaxially nanostructured with SrTe at a concentration of 4 mole per cent and mesostructured with powder processing and spark plasma sintering. This increase in ZT beyond the threshold of 2 highlights the role of, and need for, multiscale hierarchical architecture in controlling phonon scattering in bulk thermoelectrics, and offers a realistic prospect of the recovery of a significant portion of waste heat



    The 15% is maybe not easy to compare because the temperature for rossi may be higher, making better efficiency, for a lower figure of merit.

  • Lawrence Forsley, Pamela Mosier-Boss: Condensed Matter Nuclear Reaction Peer-Reviewed Publications

    I just found on academia.edu a new publication by Lawrence Forsley and Pamela Mosier-Boss, which present a list of key peer-reviewed CMNS/LENR papers, and patents, to challenge the usual claim that LENR experimenst are not replicated, and not peer reviewed.


    Pamela Mosier-Boss is a famous LENR scientists in US Navy SPAWAR


    Lawrence Forsley is today affiliated to JWK Corporation and GEC (Global Energy Corporation), beside U. of Texas.
    GEC is a company created with ex-Spawar researchers trying to develop an hybrid fission/LENR reactor (see old thread http://www.lenr-forum.com/old-forum-static/f-86.html ).



    https://www.academia.edu/17964…lear_Science_October_2015


    Here is the conclusion which tells the main intents:

    Quote


    This comprehensive collection of peer-reviewed papers clearly defines the existence of, and many ofthe parameters associated with, condensed matter nuclear science. The palladium/deuterium co-deposition protocol has shown itself to be robust, replicable and repeatable. As such, it provides an accessible doorway to investigate this novel, nuclear phenomena.


    It has the promise of controllable nuclear reactions without ionizing radiation; compact, green nuclear energy sources and a means to remediate existing nuclear waste. We ignore this new capability at our technological, environmental and commercial peril.


    Here is extract from the Executive Summary, where I underlined statement that I feel important :





    The most intriguing sentence is :

    Quote


    Our research and implementation is a few years ahead of what we have published. Contact us regarding our current work in hybrid fusion-fission reactors, energetics and compact power generation.


    There is a paragraph about the replications of their co-deposition protocol:


    The rest of the article include many information, like list of peer reviewed papers, their authors, patents, abstracts with link .


    A document to use to break the denial.

  • Experimental Evidence on Rossi Devices

    @Thomas Clarke
    I don't master you computation, and mine are more simple, with result just as bound on COP and on emissivity.


    Note that the simple apparent increase of COP between two near temperature at 800-900W, which rule out huge emissivity change, is a strong indication of an anomaly (COP!=1).
    None of your theories can explain that.
    The same method with 450-800 travel, assuming an error in emissivity, that it does not go down, still let a COP=1 impossible.
    This observation is much simpler than you method, and since it estimate heat from a T^4 rule, being more precise would simply reduce the impact of the emissivity error.
    If you consider that part of the reactor was colder than the maximum temperature, those parts will simply contribute less than the hottest parts to the COP reduction.
    (note that to avoid errors, I prefer to think in relative value... it resist better to assumption change).
    Since convection cause power leak mostly proportional to T-T0, using T4 law increase the "discount" caused by emissivity error.


    With my bounding, the only possibility to explain Lugano result is assuming that emissivity is much below 0.7 at 450C, and emissivity above 1 at 900W, increasing quickly between 800-900W. This is not coherent with known data, or with MFMP observations (more about emissivity stable around 0.9).
    All that incoherence, make me estimate that my assumption of emissivity around 0.9 is wrong.


    You don't say it is a fraud, but this is the only possible explanation Double language is like Mary your style (her, it is not to admit she denies LENR).


    Claiming Rossi is a fraudster is possible, you just need evidence, or at least lack of countrary evidence.
    There are many countrary evidence for fraud, like tycoon investments, and test where he don't have full control.


    The test in Lugano may even be negative that the procedure itself show that Rossi was not predicting a negative result. This rule out fraud.


    you correctly, like Jed&al, state that most of his tests were very loose, with bad calibration. He is an inventor, and maybe his test were only convincing for the people in the room, and sometime convinced them it failed miserably, but was sincere and deserving further work.


    Note that it is not the case for Ferrara test. This is the only correctly calibrated test. this is why the only theory that Pomp&al found was fraud, which is refuted by testers testimony (I cited it), and by the relative testers freedom of ferrara testers, and full freedom of Lugano testers.
    The melting at ferrara also shows that it is not electricity which caused the melting, since it get much above metal melting temperature.


    Science is a tool, and here the scientific evidence are not so good. Anyway there is not only science, there is intelligence, logic.
    there is also pile of evidences, and pile of knowledge of what is possible or not.


    E-cat is either :
    1- a more or less working device
    2- a non functional device that Rossi & al consider as working
    3- a fraud organized by a Rossi&al who expect to make a real device (seems what happened with DGT)
    4- a fraud organized upfront (this is for me the case of many free energy scam, and mary yugo position on LENR)


    if 3 or 4, the test cannot be sincere, cannot be done with any freedom granted to the testers. It could be considered with the pony show of E-cat before Ferrara, even if the failure you cite did not match that idea (more like 2).
    Point 2 could be possible at the beginning, but with a big team, this cannot continue, and the problem is to be found. Either they correct the problem, move to a fraudulent organisation like 3, or close the story.


    The problem is that the good work of Ferrara was efficiently hidden by Pomp&al conspiracy theory.
    The isotopic shift of Lugano is also a good evidence, as long as you don't use bad skeptic assumption, but testimony of testers.


    Finally, yes Rossi did not do many good test, but the few one which are convincing are ignored because of efficient disinformation.


    Can someone seriously can explain Ferrara result, and Lugano isotopic result, using all available data and testimony, without building a conspiracy theory.


    note again that there is nothing "extraordinary" in E-cat claim, as it is simply yet another LENR phenomenon, just scaled up like nobody yet seems to have done it.
    Note that Brillouin, supported by SRI scientists, claim similar results, even if less fantastic.


    finally the success of sceptic, is based on loose job by Rossi, by Lugano calorimetry, but mostly by disinformation and cherry picked data, making most people ignore that Ferrara and Lugano isotopic results are solid.

  • Industrial Heat Slideshow Posted (Cobraf.com)

    the chinese LENr site reacted to ECW post.


    http://www.lenr.com.cn/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=6&id=491


    The Chinese owner of the blog does not take this news as full evidence of definitive signature :


    Quote


    US [lexicon]industrial heat[/lexicon] and Rossi after the acquisition agreement signed technology, began to accelerate his pace of global distribution, its CEO frequent in the country, and local governments and related businesses contacts.
    ...
    Cold Fusion World Comments:
    on cold fusion technology was introduced to the State of Sino-US Science and Technology Baishishan International Innovation Park news, I also did not see the official reports, it is still not sure whether the project has been formally signed. But from the Introduction Sino-US Science and Technology International Innovation Baishishan National Park official site, I believe that even if there is no formal contract has basically determined the introduction of the technology, if nickel-hydrogen cold fusion technology really smooth introduction into the country, then It will bring a new round of change for the country's energy structure, speed up China's energy structure from the traditional to the new energy pace of structural adjustment.

  • Experimental Evidence on Rossi Devices

    The problem is that you claims are incompatible with a fraud.


    you ignore one demo in the early time that was working, but where some skeptics claimed witjout evidence that there was a misplaced thermocouple. The curve of the heat was analysed by skeptic LENR expert (like you they were not confident in Rossi), and beside many questions it was clear some anomalous heat was produced.


    Accusation on dry steam are just suspicion again, and raise more question than are evidence.


    This is the typical Mary Yugo argument, concluding from lack of data, or from one's own unproven claims.




    The way the test were conducted show more loose work, and some paranoia, than stage magic.
    Mats Lewan explain well that many of his test were failures, which is not typical of fraudsters.
    Some of his demo are only wrong in the mind of skeptics, because of missing or simply ignored data.


    My position on those test is that it was hard to conclude because badly done ,and because of incomplete data.


    At that period, the loose job, and your good work of disinformation make me very suspicious on rossiR, which I was judging between the deluded inventor and the loose engineer.
    Unlike some people I can change my opinion based on new evidence.


    About Ferrara, the only theory is FRAUD, because calorimetry was well calibrated.
    Moreover the inventor cannot ignore his reactor does not work, at this level.


    This EXCLUDE the delusion, or the ERROR. This REQUIREs that Rossi is PLANNING stage magic to fool testers and control everything the testers may check. This is the theory to check.


    The reactor was accessible by the testers, who could remove plugs check them, and replug, which exclude all fraud theories like coaxial wires.


    There is some precision on the test that complete the report and exclude stage magic as you imagine, because there was too much freedom to test where the fraud should be
    http://ecatnews.com/?p=2620
    http://ecatnews.com/?p=2528
    The critic of Ericsson and Pomp is pure conspiracy theory, and there is nothing better than that.


    One could end the story there, and meanwhile Cherokee invested 10millions , because of that test, and because of others tests done by their experts.
    At the same period Woodford fund did some "due diligence".


    Lugano is more a problem as there is possibility of an error on emissivity, which is assumed from tables and not calibrated at high temperature.


    One solution is to ignore it, as we don't need it. Ferrara prove it is not a fraud, and thus it works.


    About Lugano fraud theories note that initial theory of inverted clamp is incompatible with the theory of emissivity error, as COP would be below 50%.


    The conspiracy theory of fraudulent reactor is impossible because except at few moment the testers controlled the setup, the environment. In that context stage magic is impossible.
    Any of the testers could use a RF spectrometer, an ammeter, a thermocouple to check the reality of the measurements done by the others.


    You introduce false information on the Isotopic measurement which is based on misreading the report with an interpretation that support your theory, but which is denied by witness.
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2014…want-lenr-fusione-fredda/


    Rossi did not empty the reactor but assisted to the operation.
    Something strange happened, even strange to Rossi, who have no theory for the observation, unlike usual fraudster who have a scenario for their show.


    The calorimetry is more a problem, but unlike yours, I posted here computation who account for the calibration done at low temperature.


    We agreed on the interpretation of the IR cam result as proportional to the IR energy in the 7.5-13um windows which is well approximated
    the ratio of apparent temperature, if emissivity was wrong, led to a COP which is much above 1, 1.85 assuming emissivity does not decrease as the table says.


    I've discussed that problem which makes your theory impossible.
    Lugano performance recalculated - the baseline for replications

    Quote


    with that simplified computation there are incoherence that appear :
    - the change from 450W to 900W seems to cause x3.7 instead of x2 power increase, from 400 to 745C, implying a COP of 1.85
    - the change from 450W to 800W seems to cause x3.06 instead of x1.72 power increase, from 400 to 675C, implying a COP of 1.71
    - the change from 800 to 900W seems to cause 23% increase instead of 13% with a 70C change in temperature from 675 to 745C


    just these ratio shows, that even with the total messup with emissivity, COP=1 is impossible (it is 1.85 at least, assuming emissivity does not grow).


    I consider possible , but not sure at all, that emissivity was wrong and that COP was weak, about 1.5-2.
    Anyway since it is a failure of the physicists that rossi could not predict, and that even if you could say he tried to push them to that bad assumption, it was too risky, too uncertaine, and far from the work of a fraudster.


    Just add the commercial evidences and Ferrara, and the previous demos that probably were not total failures like the legend say, but just loosely done, and loosely criticized work...


    Instead of using bayesian logic from initially wrong assumptions, and bending model to only fit your assumptions, reanalyse all the data today like a newborn. What you do is Track and lock error, well known in aeronautic (and justice).


    I forgot to say that Rossi's claims have nothing "extraordinary", as it is simply LENR, which is proven. It is an industrial claim or a scaling up of LENr in another hydride system.


    There have been demo with many pêople.
    Initially it was loosely organised, sometime failed, but some of the test let witness happy.


    The probability of fraud was at that time not possible, but not so credible because of loose organization, incompatible with stage magic.


    Ferrara was a good test, just too short to be sure, and with incredible conspiracy theory to ruleout.


    Lugano test is good in that rossi could not plan to fraud it in anyway, and that he was preparing to have a reactor sincerely tested.
    Isotopic shift is genuine because Rossi agains could not fiddle with it securely given the protocol. Even a magician requires that the procedure be predictable.


    You start with credible assumption, basically that F&P were wrong in may 1989, and then once locked you bend evidence interpretation to match your beliefs.


    You work on Lugano is just a little biasedin ignoring the consequence of the initial calibration, but this have no importance you are wrong. the only question is FRAUD or NOT FRAUD.


    and FRAUD IS INCREDIBLE.


    any honest skeptic should see you theory smell like 9/11 conspiracy theory.

  • Механизм преодоления кулоновского барьера в низкоэнергетических ядерных реакциях

    in Proatom.ru , an article , by Ukrainian scientist "Eugene Andreev" that deserve some good translation


    http://www.proatom.ru/modules.php?file=article&name=News&sid=6352

    Quote from Евгений Андреев


    Механизм преодоления кулоновского барьера в низкоэнергетических ядерных реакциях


    Евгений Андреев1,2 ([email protected]), Геннадий Савинков2([email protected]), 1Институт физики НАНУ, 2НИП «Nucleon», Киев, Украина

    Цель данной короткой статьи - дать большинству исследователей LENR (многие из которых не являются физиками-ядерщиками) максимально доступное для понимания представление о механизме преодоления кулоновского барьера в низкоэнергетических ядерных реакциях, изложенное в работе Е.Андреева «О Кулоновском барьере в LENR–процессах». Приносим извинения перед профессионалами за сделанные здесь упрощения.


    Quote from Eugene Andreev


    The mechanism to overcome the Coulomb barrier in low-energy nuclear reactions


    Eugene Andreev 1,2 ([email protected]), Gennady Savinkov 2([email protected] ) 1 Institute of Physics, National Academy of Sciences, 2 NPC «Nucleon», Kiev, Ukraine The purpose of this short article - to give the majority of researchers LENR (many of which are not nuclear physicists) accessible to the understanding of the concept of the mechanism to overcome the Coulomb barrier in low-energy nuclear reactions, E. Andreev set out in the "About Coulomb barrier in LENR-processes". We apologize to the professionals for simplification made here.


    ...


    I cannot comment, it seems to propose theory.

  • Industrial Heat Slideshow Posted (Cobraf.com)

    the slides came from


    http://chinauspark.com/appUpda…5/20140925152226_9375.pdf


    the website of the park where came also photos


    http://chinauspark.com/


    seen too there
    http://www.bsscustip.com/newsinfo.aspx?id=846


    another pfoto from cobraf came from there


    http://www.bjxinghuyuan.com/news_view.php?tid=23&&id=125


    seems same visit as those we analysed before


    http://www.icebank.cn/news/detail_2.php?id=113
    http://www.icebank.cn/news/detail_2.php?id=118
    http://www.icebank.cn/news/detail_2.php?id=121


    reported by chinese lenr forum


    http://www.lenr.com.cn/index.php?m=content&c=index&a=show&catid=6&id=151


    Here is the news about the signing of the agreement on 18 oct 2015, with industrialist but also representative of Asian governements


    http://chinauspark.com/newsinfo.aspx?id=846
    Translated
    http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=fr&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=fr&u=http://chinauspark.com/newsinfo.aspx%3Fid%3D846


    Quote from Translated by Google


    Baishishan national Sino-US Science and Technology International Innovation Park, is in the "building of new relations between big powers China and the US" consensus backgrounds Chairman Xi Jinping and President Obama reached at the Sino-US dialogue mechanism innovation, the Chinese and US governments, enterprises, universities and research institutions to jointly support and participation, together to create an international science and technology innovation demonstration zone, intellectual property protection and high-end talent aggregation platform heights.


    Baishishan national Sino-US Science and Technology International Innovation Park will effectively promote and enhance the level of scientific and technological innovation of Beijing, Tianjin, Beijing, Tianjin and promote coordinated development. Baishishan national Sino-US Science and Technology Innovation Park will be international with the United States in the new energy, new materials, software and information, biomedical engineering, high-end equipment manufacturing and other areas of cooperation, the introduction of incubation, transformation, demonstrate a number of new technological achievements, high-tech enterprise, has become an important base for Sino-US technical and industrial cooperation, to fully draw on the successful experience of Triangle Park, North Carolina, California, Silicon Valley, innovation and entrepreneurship, attracted by its technological innovation transfer of resources to the park, to strengthen business between China and the United States technology companies cooperation.


    Baishishan national and international content of Sino-US Science and Technology Innovation Park building includes research and development park, manufacturing park, the World Innovation Forum permanent venue like. The total area of 14.5 square kilometers. Including R & D manufacturing 7.25 square kilometers, the World Innovation Forum venue, commercial, residential, tourism and other ancillary facilities 7.25 square kilometers. Settled early projects include "Industrial reaction heat energy use Nickel" project, "American HANKOR new fireproof materials," project, "Israel NPG natural poultry breeding technology projects," "Hughes satellite operations center", "ITURAN" car network, "China Telecom pico base station "satellite application industry base, the transfer mobile video Internet content distribution platform," iron "satellite industry base," L-band multimedia transmission network "industrial base," Beidou satellite "civilian commercial operation projects.


    "Industrial reaction heat energy use Nickel" probably mean :
    "[lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon]" "Low Energy Nickel Reaction" as Darden write in his slides.

  • Rossi Explains ‘Positive or Negative’

    please Mary, you state the extraordinary theory that US army was fooled by 2 US companies and an Italian inventor.


    There is a report which says the opposite.


    you have nothing.


    please be scientific, admit you have nothing substantial.


    all your reasoning is concluding from missing evidence, and in case it is not missing, rejecting the dissenting evidences as "inconvenient".


    I know how 9/11 conspiracy fan behave, you do the same.